Amid the harrowing violence unfolding in the Israel-Gaza conflict, calls for adherence to international law have resounded. This begs the question: What are the established rules that govern war and armed conflicts, and how do they apply to this ongoing crisis?
International humanitarian law, encompassing the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Protocols, forms the bedrock of permissible methods and means of warfare. A central tenet of this body of law, applicable to all parties involved, mandates that civilians must not be targeted. Moreover, it unequivocally states that an attack should not be carried out if it is expected to result in disproportionate harm to civilians or civilian infrastructure in relation to the anticipated military gains.
These laws extend to various provisions, prohibiting actions such as hostage-taking, undue destruction and appropriation of property, as well as assaults on medical facilities. Access to humanitarian relief for civilians in need is also an obligation.
In the realm of international law, jus ad bellum addresses the conditions under which states can resort to war or armed force. Self-defense, cited by Israel in its response to the conflict, is one justification for war, enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter. However, even when invoking the right of self-defense, international humanitarian law must still be observed. In essence, the legitimate exercise of self-defense does not grant a state the liberty to employ unlimited means and is bound by jus in bello to mitigate suffering in armed conflicts.
This will be a pivotal issue as the spotlight turns to the situation in Gaza.
Furthermore, international criminal law falls within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and national courts. The ICC possesses authority over individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. War crimes, in the ICC’s view, are “grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions” and “other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict,” encompassing the above-mentioned provisions of international humanitarian law.
Crimes against humanity include acts like murder, extermination, and population transfer when executed as part of a widespread or systematic assault against any civilian population.
The current conflict is ripe for investigations and charges related to war crimes and crimes against humanity. Both sides have faced accusations of genocide, though prosecuting this crime is far more challenging, as it pertains to “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.” Unlike war crimes and crimes against humanity, genocide need not be linked to an armed conflict.
It’s worth noting that while Israel is not a member of the ICC, Palestine joined in 2015, and crimes committed on Palestinian territory may fall within the ICC’s jurisdiction. In 2021, the ICC initiated an investigation into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories, an inquiry that has been met with staunch resistance from Israel.
International humanitarian law, jus ad bellum, and international criminal law collectively form a complex framework aimed at preventing undue suffering in armed conflicts and holding those responsible for violations accountable. In the ongoing Israel-Gaza crisis, the world watches closely as these laws are put to the test.
